Smt. Kanchanben M. Panchasara, Rajkot V. The ITO, Ward-3(1)(3), Rajkot

ITA 34/RJT/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0006 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-09-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 17-02-2020
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरणआयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, राजकोट 瀈यायपीठ 瀈यायपीठ瀈यायपीठ 瀈यायपीठ, , , , राजकोट IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT (Conducted Through Virtual Court) ] ] BEFORE SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.34/RJT/2020 Assessment Year : 2007-08 Smt.Kanchanben M. Panchasara L/H of late Shri Mahendrabhai D. Panchasara Rajkot. PAN : ATTPP 3912 C Vs ITO, Ward-3(1)(3) Rajkot. (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee by : Devina Patel, AR Revenue by : Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr.DR स ु नवाई क तार ख/D a t e o f H e a r i n g : 1 4 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 2 घोषणा क तार ख /D a t e o f P r o n o u n c e m e n t : 1 4 / 0 9 / 2 0 2 2 आदेश/O R D E R PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Ahmedabad (in short referred to as CIT(A)), dated 8.10.2018 pertaining to Assessment Year 2011-12 under section 250(6) Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short) confirming penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 2. At the outset, we are not dealing with the issue of 14 days delay in filing appeal before the Tribunal, as noted by the Registry, since the ld.counsel for the assessee has filed a copy of Form No.5 ITA No.34/Rjt/2020 2 being the order issued by the designated authority for full and final settlement of tax arrears under Vivad Se Vishwas scheme, and thereby settling the issue with the Department. It has brought to our notice that in quantum proceedings, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No.133/RJT/2014 was dismissed as withdrawn. It was pointed out that the present appeal was a penalty appeal in relation to the said quantum appeal and stood settled on settlement of the quantum appeal in VSVS scheme, 2020. Our attention was drawn to the issue addressed by the CBDT in its clarification issued on the VSV scheme in Cir.No.9/2020 dated 22.4.2020 at Question No.8 as under: Question No. 8 Imagine a case where an appellant desires to settle concealment penalty appeal pending before CIT(A), while continuing to litigate quam appeal that has travelled to higher appellate forum. Considering these are two independent and different appeals, whether appellant can settle one in exclusion of others ? If yes, whether settlement of penalty appeal will have any impact on quantum appeal ? Answer: If both quantum appeal covering disputed tax and appeal against penalty levied on such disputed tax for an assessment year are pending, the declarant is required to file a declaration form covering both disputed tax appeal and penalty appeal. However, he would be required to pay relevant percentage of disputed tax only. Further, it would not be possible for the appellant to ITA No.34/Rjt/2020 3 apply for settlement of penalty appeal only when the appeal of disputed tax related to such penalty is still pending. 3. In the above of the same, the assessee sought withdrawal of the present appeal as settled under the VSV Scheme, 2020. The ld.DR has no objection to the same. 4. In the light of the above submission made by the assessee, we find no reason to keep pending appeal of the assessee before the Tribunal. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed. 5. In the result, appeal of assessee stands dismissed under VSV Scheme. Order pronounced in the Court on 14 th September, 2022 at Ahmedabad. Sd/- Sd/- (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad, dated 14/09/2022